Cap'n Piranha

Boy, am I embarrassed to have my math corrected by an abacus user .

The Twins only control their own destiny vis a vis winning the division if the White Sox lose tonight (Thursday). Even if they do, the Twins can only be guaranteed a division title if they sweep. However many games the Twins lose this weekend is how many the White Sox would have to lose for the Twins to win the Central.

By far the two most likely scenarios are the Twins get the three seed and play the Astros, or the 4 seed and play the Yankees. I would bet a lot of money on those two scenarios versus any other combination.

The Twins playoff scenarios are as below; The Twins cannot finish with the 6 or 8 seed.The Twins magic number to finish ahead of Cleveland is 1. If they do that, they cannot be the 7 seedThe Twins magic number to finish ahead of New York is 2 (perhaps 1). Both the Twins and Yankees have 23 division wins, but the Yankees play Buffalo tonight. Win that, and the Yankees get the tiebreak, and the number is 2. If Buffalo wins tonight, I'm not sure who gets the tiebreak between the Twins and Yankees, as I don't want to look at results of the last 40 games. Regardless, 2 Twins wins/Yankees losses mean the Twins can't be the 5 seed.Both Tampa and Oakland have already won more division games than the Twins, and therefore have the tiebreak. Tampa's magic number to finish ahead of the Twins (and White Sox) is 1.Oakland has 5 games left (1 against LAD, 4 against Sea). The Twins must win at least the same number of games as Oakland to finish ahead of OaklandThe Twins must win at least one more game than Chicago the rest of the way to finish ahead of ChicagoTL;DR Seeds 6 & 8 are impossible Seeds 1 & 7 are improbable Seeds 2 & 5 are possible, but unlikely Seeds 3 & 4 are the most likely If the Twins are seed 4, they will likely play the Yankees (the Yankee's magic number to finish ahead of Toronto is 1). Otherwise, if the Twins are the 3 seed, they are guaranteed to play Houston. In short, cheer for Cleveland and Oakland today, then the Twins to sweep and Oakland to at least split with Seattle. That would put the Twins on the 3 line, which is the best possible draw, imo.

Yeah, this is an overreaction. Since 2016 when Kepler became a (mostly) full time player, he is 10th in MLB for WAR amongst right fielders, at 10.8. Thats about 40% more than Heyward at 7.7; the Cubs have paid Hayward $115M, while the Twins have paid Kepler less than $14M over the same timeframe. The Cubs still owe Heyward $69M over the next three years, while the Twins will only need to pay Kepler $22.75M for the next 3 years (including a buyout if they don't pick up the 2024 option). Kepler has certainly struggled this year, but that's compared to last year--he's been worth 0.9 WAR in 43 games, which means he's worth about 3.1 WAR over 150 games. That's absolutely a first division regular, and a fantastic value.

I'm disappointed in Donaldson for getting himself kicked out of this one. You're playing the team you're chasing, in a game you pretty much have to have if you want the division, and it's a nailbiter. Instead of acting like the 34 year old leader he's supposed to be, Donaldson decides to throw a tantrum because he didn't like the ump's strike zone. I've got news for you--that's going to happen from time to time. It's surely happened to Donaldson before, and it will happen again. Control your emotions, and stay in the game for your team.

Buxton in September; .308/.308/.744/1.051, .430 wOBA, 175 wRC+, 7 XBH to 7 K. And that's before today's homer.

I'm pretty sure Provus confirmed on the broadcast intra-division record is the next tie-breaker after head to head. He also mentioned the White Sox are something like 5 games up on the Twins in that metric.

The Twins drafted Buxton #2 overall. The Astros took Correa at 1:1.

So when you see a guy with RBI's, you just assume he's better at dealing with mental pressure, without bothering to understand the context of the situation? I don't deny that some players are better at handling mental pressure, and there could be some extra mental pressure in RBI opportunities. However, you seem to ignore that there could also be extra mental pressure on pitchers/defenders in those situations too. Furthermore, the pitcher usually has to pitch from the stretch instead of the windup (unless it's a reliever who always pitches from the stretch). This is borne out by the fact that hitters generally perform better with RISP than bases empty (link at the bottom). If RBI opportunities create pressure which reduces performance, than why are there broad-based (meaning across all batters) increases in average and OBP in RISP situations? Given a hitter full credit for an RBI without examining context is like giving a football player full credit for a TD without examining the context. Maybe the wide receiver ran a perfect route, adjusted for the catch, and then outran two DB's to the end zone. Maybe the running back made a guy miss in the backfield, then broke 5 tackles while tip-toeing the sideline. Or maybe the fullback walked into the end zone from the 1 yard line after the O-Line pushed the D-Line 3 yards backwards at the snap. Context matters. And that's all me, or anyone else who doesn't want to use RBI as a standalone stat, are saying. https://www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/29288/prospectus-feature-the-risp-mystery/#:~:text=So%20I%20looked%20for%20hitters,than%20in%20other%20plate%20appearances.&text=All%20of%20this%20makes%20a,appearances%20in%20a%20season%20batted%20.

My whole point with the swing is if the inputs are the same (launch angle, exit velocity, atmospheric conditions, etc), the hits will be identical--same distance, same elevation, same landing spot. The process of the batter hitting the ball, if identical, will produce identical results. The entire point I was making about RBI's is that the process of the batter hitting the ball can be identical, and yet yield non-identical results, vis-a-vis RBI. This demonstrates that RBI's are not completely controllable by the batter, and as such, in order to truly quantify batter performance via RBI, we need additional data.

Which is why there are park factors. People who understand that concept get that 30 homers in Petco is more impressive than 30 homers in Yankee stadium, and will value those players accordingly. What I'm saying is there needs to be a "park factor" for RBI, to help us understand if the RBI came from a solo home run, or the fast runner on third scoring on a routine grounder. Those are vastly different processes to get to the same outcome, and unlike homeruns, I'm not aware of a readily available stat that can speak to that.

But not to the degree that RBI's are. With the bases empty, you cannot get an RBI unless you hit a HR. RBI's are way more contextually driven than almost anything else, because that context comes within the game from other players. If you have two identically hit balls in the same stadium, if one is a homer, so is the other. That's not true of the situation I outlined. Stealing bases off Astudillo is different than Molina, but everyone in that game gets to steal off the same guy--the situation is constant, and therefore is not the determinant of outcome.

But putting a ball in play (barring the very rare case of an inside the park HR) with no one on base is also, by that standard, worthless. The problem with RBI as a stat is not that it's worthless--it's that it's completely devoid of context. Let's say Eddie Rosario hits a routine ground ball to the second baseman with less than two outs. If Byron Buxton is on third, there's a good chance Rosario gets an RBI. If Nelson Cruz is on third, it's essentially a 0% chance Rosario gets an RBI. Exact same batted ball by Rosario, diametrically opposite RBI outcomes. The reason for that is because often a large part of the run being scored has absolutely nothing to do with the batter who gets credit for the RBI. Thus, absent an accompanying, context-providing stat, RBI is at best a crude metric, and at worst, a downright misleading one.

I think Homer is going to be odd man out come playoff time. Barring an injury, Maeda, Pineda, and Berrios are your top 3 starters. If you're going for a fourth starter, it's Hill or Dobnak (maybe a piggyback situation). In the bullpen, Rogers, Romo, Duffey, Wisler, Clippard, and Alcala all seem to be better options, and that's not yet counting May, Stashak, Smeltzer, or Littell. Maybe he gets thrown in the mix as an inning eater in a laugher, but my guess is that if Homer Bailey is pitching playoff innings for the Twins this year, something has gone horribly awry.

If I'm the Twins, I make Nelson a 3 year, $40M offer this offseason. $15M in years 1 and 2, $10M in year 3 with a $5M buyout. By wRC+, Nelson is the second-best hitter in baseball this year; better than anyone not named Juan Soto. I'm sure he'll decline, but even if he loses 150 points of OPS, he's still in the mid-20's for all hitters. Given the quality of individual he is, as well as his impact on and off the field, I think you do everything you can to have him retire a Twin.

It's the exact same AAV as Davis', just one year longer. And at least the Cubs got positive value out of it--the Orioles are literally going to end up paying $161 Million dollars for a guy worse than whatever 4A outfielder or waiver wire castoff they could have plugged in. Out of 50 qualified 1B, he is the worst. If you expand to 500 PA's over the last 5 years, it's 77 players; Davis is 77th. For right fielders, there are amazingly the exact same number of players in the last 5 years with at least 500 PA--77; Heyward is 18th. The Heyward contract is awful to be sure, but the Davis one is hideous.

A few more. Chris Davis--2 years left after 2020, total of 7 years and $161M, -2.4 WAR to date Justin Upton--2 years left after 2020, total of 5 years and $106M, 2.6 WAR to date Jason Heyward--3 years left after 2020, total of 8 years and $184M, 7.6 WAR to date Eric Hosmer--5 years left after 2020, total of 8 years and $144M, 0.4 WAR to date Chris Davis, to my mind, has to be the worst contract in MLB history.

I also did come up with a comparable white player to Rosario--CJ Cron. Last year Cron hit a homer every 20 PA's, Rosario did it every 18.4. Look at the RBI/PA rates for various scenarios below. Rosario with none on--18 RBI in 305 PA--.06 RBI/PA Cron with none on--14 RBI in 284 PA--.05 RBI/PA Rosario with men on--91 RBI in 285 PA--.32 RBI/PA Cron with men on--64 RBI in 215 PA--.30 RBI/PA Rosario with RISP--79 RBI in 173 PA--.46 RBI/PA Cron with RISP--55 RBI in 121 PA--.45 RBI/PA Cron isn't known for gunning down players on the basepaths sure, but that's not something first basemen get a chance to do much. Cron did rate out better defensively than Rosario, by a lot; of the 24 players who logged at least 500 innings in left field in 2019, Rosario was 21st in UZR/150, 18th in errors, and dead last in range (his arm was 3rd). Cron was 20th out of 29 first basemen by UZR/150, 26th in errors, and 8th in range (there's no measurement for arm for first basemen). None of us were upset when the Twins let Cron go, despite the fact that he is reasonably comparable to Rosario in Rosario's alleged strengths.

Eddie's hard hit rate is indeed the second highest of his career. That being said, his 37.5% hard hit rate is good for 106th out of 154 qualified hitters, which puts him in about the 31st percentile. He also has the highest soft contact rate of his career, at 21.9%. That puts him 13th out of those same 154 qualified hitters, which is in the 91st percentile. By any definition, Eddie does not do a good job of making solid contact. Eddie's zone rate (percent of pitches that would be called strikes) is 34%, which is second lowest in all of baseball--only Bryce Harper sees fewer pitches in the zone. Pitchers are still able to keep Rosario off the bases (as evidenced by his .311 OBP, 121st out of the 154 hitters) without having to give him pitches to hit.

Well, that's not what happened. The author said he made a stupid mistake--here's the quotation lifted directly from yesterday's game wrap. "For the second consecutive day, Eddie Rosario made a stupid base running mistake that likely cost the Twins runs early in the game" No where is he called stupid. I'll also work on naming a current white player with Rosario's stats when you name a white player with your collection of old-school platitudes. Your middle paragraph, wherein you state you don't accept anyone's argument that Rosario is a bad player, is also problematic, for a couple of reasons. Number one, it suggests you are not open to changing your mind, even if evidence suggests it; head-in-the-sand thinking is dangerous. Second, no one is saying Rosario is a bad player; the whole point of the article is that Rosario costs the team runs, and potentially wins, due to his continued overaggression, and eroding skills everywhere except homers, RBI's, and throwing. If he was inexpensive, or at a position with little depth, it's not necessarily grounds for moving on, but neither of those two conditions are true. Rosario is more expensive than the average player. He also plays at the Twins greatest position of strength, where much, if not all of his production could conceivably be replaced by players making less than 10% of what Rosario does. That money can be used to extend Berrios, re-sign Cruz/Odo, lock in a young player to a Kepler/Polanco type deal, or try and obtain additional talent on the free agent market.

I would explain 2019 by pointing out that Rosario had ONE more RBI than Cruz despite 69 more PA's. I would also point out that Rosario had 285 PA's with at least one runner on, and 173 with at least one runner in scoring position--Cruz had 248 and 135. So despite having more total PA's, PA's with runners on, and PA's with runners in scoring, Eddie only managed one more RBI--this proves Cruz is a much better hitter, which is borne out by pretty much every stat. The story is largely the same this year. Rosario again has exactly ONE more RBI than Cruz, but has 3 more PA's. Although that is small, as is the number of PA's with runners on (72 for Rosario, 68 for Cruz), the big difference is in PA's with runners in scoring position--44 for Rosario, and only 31 for Cruz. Rosario has more RBI's, both this year and last, because he not only has more opportunities to drive in runs, he has better opportunities as well. As for the clutch argument--this year, Rosario has had 14 PA's labelled high leverage by fangraphs. He is slashing .154/.214/.462/.676, with only 2 xbh, a wOBA of .279, a wRC+ of 72, with only 30.8% hard contact (that is, he's not getting hurt by at 'em balls). Cruz has had 9 high leverage PA's, and is slashing .286/.444/.286/.730 with no xbh, a wOBA of .355, a wRC+ of 123, and 66.7% hard contact. For a bigger sample size, here's high leverage stats for 2019. Rosario--49 PA's, .364/.408/.636/1.045, 8 xbh, .421 wOBA, 166 wRC+, 37.2% hard hit Cruz--42 PA's, .323/.500/.484/.984, 5 xbh, .402 wOBA, 153 wRC+, 40.9% hard hit So a little bit of an advantage to Rosario, but not hugely so, and one that has not repeated itself this year. It's also worth noting Cruz only had 53.5% strikes in high leverage, while Rosario had 62.8%. Given that Rosario only walked 8.2% of the time, whereas Cruz walked 26.2% of the time, I think we can fairly assume that Cruz was getting far fewer pitches to hit than Rosario, which can explain some differences as well. Overall, Rosario's HR and RBI numbers look great, but are largely situationally driven, and paper over the other holes in Rosario's game. You know, kinda the point Nick was trying to make.

Cool racism accusation bro! Can you name any current white Twins player with mediocre to bad stats that continues to get playing time AND praise for hustle/hard-nosed play/leaving it all on the field? If not, maybe we can accept the author's argument on it's merits, rather than conduct a search for implicit bias in an owner of a site that has been quite progressive in the current climate.

Although I'd hate to lose him for nothing, at this point Nick Gordon is fairly superfluous. If you want Cruz back next year (and why wouldn't you), there are literally no infield spots open for 3 more years or until Cruz retires. In the outfield, Gordon is definitely behind Kiriloff and Larnach, not to mention Rosario, Buxton, and Kepler who all have at least 1 year of control left. If the cost to getting a right-handed power bat to use against lefties is letting Gordon walk for free, I am all for it.

The trade deadline definitely came at a bad time PR speaking for the Twins, but Diesel's post is largely correct. The Twins do have a passel of competent to good starters all of whom, barring further injury, will be available in the playoffs. The bullpen has been rocky lately, but that can happen when you haven't had a scheduled off day in over two weeks, and had played for 16 straight days before that, especially when there have been multiple bullpen games.4 The one area I'm worried about is the lineup, which has not looked in sync all year, which makes the non-acquisition of Marte frustrating. Given what Miami gave up, I would have thought perhaps Rooker + an a ball pitcher would have got it done, but alas. Hopefully we do to Giolito what we did opening night, and get some positivity going.